Citation Nr: 9827601
Decision Date: 09/15/98 Archive Date: 09/25/98
DOCKET NO. 92-22 865 ) DATE
)
)
On appeal from the
Department of Veterans Affairs Regional Office in
Philadelphia, Pennsylvania
THE ISSUE
Entitlement to service connection for post traumatic stress
disorder (PTSD).
REPRESENTATION
Appellant represented by: Arthur J. Rinaldi, Attorney at
Law
WITNESS AT HEARINGS ON APPEAL
Appellant
ATTORNEY FOR THE BOARD
L. M. Barnard, Counsel
INTRODUCTION
The veteran served on active duty from April 1968 to April
1972.
This appeal arose from a September 1989 rating decision of
the Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, Department of Veterans
Affairs (VA), Regional Office (RO), which denied entitlement
to service connection for PTSD. This decision was confirmed
by a rating action issued in November 1989. In August 1990,
the appellant testified at a personal hearing at the RO. In
February 1994, he testified at a personal hearing held before
a member of the Board of Veterans' Appeals (Board). In
November 1994, this case was remanded for additional
development, following which a rating action was issued in
April 1998, which continued the denial of service connection
for PTSD.
CONTENTIONS OF APPELLANT ON APPEAL
The appellant contends, in essence, that he suffers from PTSD
as a direct result of his service aboard a Naval vessel
during Vietnam. He asserted that he currently experiences
nightmares, depression and anxiety as a consequence of
traumatic events suffered in service. Therefore, he believes
that service connection is warranted.
DECISION OF THE BOARD
The Board, in accordance with the provisions of 38 U.S.C.A.
§ 7104 (West 1991 & Supp. 1997), has reviewed and considered
all of the evidence and material of record in the veteran's
claims files. Based on its review of the relevant evidence
in this matter, and for the following reasons and bases, it
is the decision of the Board that the preponderance of the
evidence is against the veteran’s claim for service
connection for PTSD.
FINDINGS OF FACT
The veteran’s subsequently diagnosed PTSD is not shown to
have its origins in his military service.
CONCLUSION OF LAW
PTSD was not incurred in or aggravated by service.
38 U.S.C.A. §§ 1110, 5107(a) (West 1991); 38 C.F.R.
§ 3.304(f) (1997).
REASONS AND BASES FOR FINDING AND CONCLUSION
The veteran's claim is well grounded within the meaning of 38
U.S.C.A. § 5107(a). That is, he has presented a claim which
is plausible. It is also found that all relevant facts have
been properly developed. The record is devoid of any
indication that there are other records available which
should be obtained. Therefore, no further development is
required in order to comply with the duty to assist mandated
by 38 U.S.C.A. § 5107(a).
Under the applicable criteria, service connection may be
granted for a disability the result of disease or injury
incurred in or aggravated by service. 38 U.S.C.A. § 1110
(West 1991).
In order to establish entitlement to service connection for
PTSD, there must be medical evidence establishing a clear
diagnosis of the condition, credible supporting evidence that
the claimed inservice stressor actually occurred, and a link,
established by medical evidence, between current
symptomatology and the claimed inservice stressor. 38 C.F.R.
§ 3.304(f); Cohen v. Brown, 10 Vet. App. 128 (1997).
The veteran’s DD-214 indicated that he was not involved in
any combat and received no injuries. He received the
National Defense Service Medal, but no combat badges or
citations. His primary military occupation was as a
boilerman, having received training in basic propulsion and
engineering and as a boilerman.
The veteran’s service medical records contain no complaints
of or treatment for a psychiatric disorder. He was
psychiatrically normal during the January 1968 entrance
examination and the September 1971 separation examination.
During a February 1981 VA examination, the veteran reported
that he was always tired and moody. However, there was no
psychiatric examination performed. During an August 1984 VA
examination he offered no psychiatric complaints. A private
psychiatric examination conducted in March 1985 diagnosed an
intermittent explosive disorder and dysthymic disorder.
The veteran was hospitalized at a private facility in
February 1986 complaining of feeling depressed and suicidal.
He was found to be spontaneous, coherent and overly detailed
in his responses to the point of being verbose. His affect
was depressed. No perceptual disorders were detected and he
admitted that he was aware of his problems controlling his
temper. Test results did not indicate symptoms of major
depression. Diagnoses of dysthymic disorder and dependent
personality disorder were entertained. It was also noted
that strong secondary gain components were highly suggested.
The veteran left the hospital against medical advice after 72
hours.
The veteran was admitted to a VA facility in September 1988
with complaints of nightmares and flashbacks. The mental
status examination noted that he was cooperative and
displayed coherent and relevant speech. His mood was
depressed and there was no evidence of a thought disorder.
The diagnoses were major depression and PTSD. He was re-
hospitalized at a VA facility between October and November
1988. He stated that he was experiencing nightmares and
flashbacks which he said were related to his Vietnam
experiences, as well outbursts of anger, depression and
survivor guilt. He stated that he had been a boiler tender
during service. He stated that he had witnessed the deaths
of 13 men during a fire in the hold of a ship. The mental
status examination indicated that he was cooperative,
pleasant, coherent, relevant and displayed no delusions or
hallucinations. His mood was dysthymic with an appropriate
affect. The diagnosis was PTSD.
VA examined the veteran in April 1989. The mental status
examination noted that his attention, orientation, memory and
intelligence were all normal. He was coherent and relevant
and reported no delusions or hallucinations. He indicated
that he had seen 13 men burn to death in a shipboard fire.
His memory appeared to be intact. He reported insomnia and
stated that he had few friends and no hobbies. He stated
that he had not been wounded during the war. His mood was
neutral and his affect was appropriate. Reasoning and
judgment were not impaired. The diagnosis was PTSD.
The record contained the Command History of the USS Meredith.
The ship was noted to be off the coast of Vietnam on May 31,
1969, when it fired 50 rounds. In June and July, 1969, she
provided gunfire support to two amphibious operations
(“Mighty Play” and “Bold Pursuit”) while at anchor in Da
Nang harbor. On July 16, 1969, there was an electrical fire
in the afterships service switchboard that destroyed two
circuit breakers and associated wiring. The was no
indication of any injuries as a result of this electrical
fire.
In June 1990, the veteran’s private physician, an internist,
was deposed. The physician testified that he had seen the
veteran since 1985 for various ailments, to include
intermittent explosive disorder and dysthymic disorder. He
stated that the veteran had said something about being hit by
a torpedo and a fire, but that he had been reluctant to
provide details. The physician opined that it was possible
that these traumatic events caused his psychiatric problem.
In August 1990, the veteran testified at a personal hearing
at the RO. He stated that a gun mount had exploded in
November 1969, three days before Thanksgiving, killing 13
men. His best friend was badly burned during this explosion.
He also indicated that there had been a fire in the hold of
the ship that he had helped to put out.
In February 1994, the veteran testified at a personal hearing
held before a member of the Board. He stated that he had
been aboard the USS Meredith off the coast of Vietnam and
that he had been involved in damage control. He related the
incident of the exploding gun mount, again stating that
several men had been burned to death, to include a close
personal friend. He also stated that the ship fired at the
shore numerous times and that he helped to put out a fire in
the hold of the ship, which caused him to become very
fearful. In the early 1980’s, he noticed that he had become
alienated and aggressive. He first went to a PTSD clinic in
1988. He also reported that since service, he had had over
40 jobs, indicating that he usually left after losing his
temper.
Social Security Administration records indicated that the
veteran had begun to receive benefits in 1986, after
examinations found that he suffered from an explosive
personality disorder and a dysthymic disorder. No diagnosis
of PTSD was made in these records.
The veteran then submitted numerous records developed between
the late 1980’s and 1996 from the Scranton Vet Center, the
Scranton Counseling Center and the Wilkes-Barre VA Medical
Center, which reflected his continuing treatment for
depression, nightmares and PTSD.
After a careful review of the evidence of record, it is found
that that evidence does not support a finding of entitlement
to service connection for PTSD. The evidence of record does
not indicate that the veteran was engaged in combat; rather,
his primary military occupation was boilerman. There is no
indication that he ever received any wounds or injuries; in
fact, he had admitted during the April 1989 VA examination
that he had not been wounded during the war. His DD-214
indicated that he received only the National Defense Service
Medal; there was no indication that he was awarded any combat
badges or citations. According to Zarycki v. Brown, 6 Vet.
App. 91, 98 (1993), when it has been determined that a
veteran was not engaged in combat, “….the veteran’s lay
testimony, by itself, will not be enough to establish the
occurrence of the alleged stressor. (cite omitted).
Instead, the record must contain service records which
corroborate the veteran’s testimony as to the occurrence of
the claimed stressor.” See also Swann v. Brown, 5 Vet. App.
229 (1993); Wood v. Derwinski, 1 Vet. App. 190 (1991). It is
noted that the record does not contain any corroboration that
the veteran experienced, witnessed, or was confronted with an
event or events that involved actual or threatened death or
serious injury to self or others. While the veteran has
alleged that he witnessed the deaths of 13 men due to an
explosion of a gun mount and helped to suppress a fire in the
hold of a ship, both of which he indicated occurred onboard
the USS Meredith in 1969, it is noted that the Command
History of this vessel for that year does not support either
allegation. This history does reflect a switchboard
electrical fire that damaged two circuit breakers and
associated wiring; however, there is no indication that any
personnel were injured as a result. The history does not
confirm either the reported gun mount explosion or the hold
fire. The veteran has provided no other specific claimed
stressor that would be capable of corroboration. Clearly,
based upon the objective evidence, there is no indication
that he was exposed to combat.
While the record contains diagnoses of PTSD based upon the
history that the veteran gave to examiners, it is concluded
that the record does not contain documentation of a
corroborated stressor to support these diagnoses. It is
further noted that a medical opinion which is “based upon an
inaccurate factual premise has no probative value.” Reonal
v. Brown, 5 Vet. App. 458, 460-1 (1993).
Therefore, it is concluded that the preponderance of the
evidence is against the veteran’s claim for service
connection for PTSD.
ORDER
Service connection for PTSD is denied.
C. P. RUSSELL
Member, Board of Veterans' Appeals
NOTICE OF APPELLATE RIGHTS: Under 38 U.S.C.A. § 7266 (West
1991 & Supp. 1997), a decision of the Board of Veterans'
Appeals granting less than the complete benefit, or benefits,
sought on appeal is appealable to the United States Court of
Veterans Appeals within 120 days from the date of mailing of
notice of the decision, provided that a Notice of
Disagreement concerning an issue which was before the Board
was filed with the agency of original jurisdiction on or
after November 18, 1988. Veterans' Judicial Review Act,
Pub. L. No. 100-687, § 402, 102 Stat. 4105, 4122 (1988). The
date which appears on the face of this decision constitutes
the date of mailing and the copy of this decision which you
have received is your notice of the action taken on your
appeal by the Board of Veterans' Appeals.
- 2 -